One of the Senate's responsibilities is to operate as a counterweight to the governor in the approval or rejection of his appointees. That counterweight is part of the advice and consent that the legislative branch provides the executive branch. It is essential that the Senate actively vet candidates and not just act as a rubber stamp.

Bradley, as this newspaper has consistently reported over the past year and a half, has obstructed real debate and instead proceeded to perpetuate the governor's political agenda. He has delayed hearings unnecessarily. He has shown disdain for members of the commission and witnesses. He has proven himself to be an enemy of science, refusing to ask that arson be subject to state-of-the-art scientific analysis.

To Rick Perry, Bradley's shortcomings are just fine. The governor signed off on the execution of Cameron Todd Willingham in 2004. Perry denied a stay despite legal briefings that showed the scientific theories used to send the Corsicana man to Death Row were suspect. Bradley canceled the meeting that would have explored those potentially embarrassing issues.

Texas' failure to address its administration of capital punishment and its irrational reliance on discredited arson science has subjected the state to deserved ridicule throughout the country.

The Houston Chronicle called for abolition of the death penalty in Texas after Anthony Graves, an innocent man who could easily have been executed, was released from prison late last year.

Notwithstanding our views, if our state insists on applying capital punishment, it must do so in an intellectually honest way. That means that the forensic evidence used to support convictions must be based on science, not conjecture.

We believe John Bradley has shown himself unwilling to engage in true scientific inquiry. He does not merit reappointment and the Senate should reject him.